US tanks arrive in Germany to help Nato defences

being a pussi is a worse idea.

deterrance?? trip wire forces?? geeeez

indeed. kinda pointless, and with trump as president, it's good riddance. US soldiers under trump would just give a false sense of security, if not outright helping the russians. best get rid of them asap.

 

Good thing we're about to be much closer to Russia then. Also, Russia never deployed to Japan. The US nuked them into surrender.

 

Right. It's better to sit back and let the Russians take more territory. Ukraine, the Baltic states, Poland, etc.

Peace for land is the best course.

 

fighting germany so you didn't have to face the full might of the wehrmacht so you could send troops to fight japan.

 

Ah yes, the US is going to help Russia take over the world!

MUUuhhhahahahahah

 

We would have just delayed the invasion of France.

 

Why?...are the German looking for Lebensraum again? I hear Sevastopol Ukraine would be a great place for German development, beaches, hotels, casinos, restaurants..they'd do a good job too!

 

They are enroute to PoLand if I am not mistaken.

 

I think it's the other way around!!! Didn't Zhukov explicitly mention that without massive aid from USA...most Russians would've been wernerschnitzel material?

 

German economic occupation of Soutern Krym would be a better than Russian Turd balls being there anytime.

 

we would we could we should... No, you wouldn't. Good luck getting into europe when fighting the whole wehrmacht. Most of the fighting of ww2 actually took place on the eastern front. USSR lost 10 million fighting against the germans. americans lost very little in the war.. facing germany alone in a one-front war, american casualties would approach soviet ones..

 

Yes actually..bierhaus, Christmas markets, Oktoberfest, reeperbahn, excellent freeways, black forest cake, blonde German ladies on beach, works for me..lol!!!

 

And without the USSR, the allied focus would have been on Japan first and atomic bombs would have been used in Germany.

 

probably, but... Hitler would not surrender because of awe from atomic bombs (he would in fact never surrender), and aside from awe, atomic bombs are like firebombing, which didn't make germany surrender either. but how effectively could you bomb germany anyways when facing them in a one front war, against the entire luftwaffe? It would essentially be all of europe, if not all of eurasia, against the usa and uk. and more importantly, how would you manage to invade germany? without the ussr, it'd be more likely ww2 would end in a truce, because invading germany would just be too costly. and there's japan also. no, you'd need a second front to win, and for that you need the ussr. isn't much to do otherwise. invading the strongest military in the world, in a one-front war, across an ocean.. that's not going to work, anyone can tell you that.

 

The Luftwaffe had no aircraft which could stop B-29's or B-36's. Nukes would utterly annihilate the industry of the Ruhr and the oil facilities in Ploesti and the German military would grind to a halt.

 

Defenses against what? Imaginary Russian plots to invade and conquer Europe?

 

Except there is zero evidence or reason to believe that Russia has any intention of invading Europe. If anything, Europe is far more likely to invade Russia judging by its past.

 

No he won't. The most he will do is get NATO members to pay more of the costs of their own defense and I doubt he will even manage that much.

In any case, "abandon" implies that Americans have some sort of obligation to defend Europe, which we do not and which runs directly counter to the wisdom of our founding fathers.

Europe is a collection of sovereign, independent nations. Therefore, they are responsible for their own defense. Americans have no obligation or responsibility towards them.

 

Strange, then why does Russia have military units massed near their border with the Baltics.

 

It would be a very smart move because it would signal a return to our founding values of neutrality and non-interventionism. For too long our so-called "allies" have distracted Americans and misdirected our national resources towards foreign adventurism and crusading. It's time Americans started worrying about our own back yard instead of trying to recreate the entire world in our own image.

You're asking why Russia has military units on its own territory? Really?

 

We do have an obligation to the defense of NATO per our ratification of the North Atlantic Treaty.

- - - Updated - - -

The Baltic States have very little in the way of military power. Why would Russia need the equivalent of two corps near their border with the Baltics?

 

Then we should repeal the treaty. It's stupid and reckless for Americans to assume responsibility for the defense of foreign nations. The entire point of declaring our independence was to extricate ourselves from European intrigues.

 

Which we would never have succeeded at without military assistance from Europe.

 

Those Baltic States are members of a military organization that is hostile towards Russia. In the past century, Russia has been invaded at least two times by European powers. At present, Russia is being encircled by NATO in violation of the agreements that ended the cold war. Russia is merely reacting to decades of aggression towards their country. The idea that they're planning an invasion of Europe is beyond asinine.

 

How is mutual defense "aggression"?